Link: ISIS stakes its claim to Libya.

Libya provides the most glaring example of the complete non-existence of proactive thinking on the part of the Obama Administration.  As Qaddafi was close to recapturing Benghazi, David Cameron and allies, including Barack Obama, elected to use Tomahawk missiles to prevent the city from falling back under regime control.  What was so wrong with regime control, anyway?  Hadn't Qaddafi displayed an increasing willingness to open up his country and his economic system to change?  Wasn't Libya a reasonably wealthy Arab country, where Libyans could still enjoy some modicum of quality of life?  Well, we intervened, Qaddafi was intercepted moving from one location to another and executed, and we did.....nothing.  Libya didn't descend into hell overnight.  The people celebrated for a week or so, and various temporary governments were set up, usually compromised of academics and human rights activists.  As of August, 2015, Libya has become a battlefield between so many different militias and jihadist factions that its not worth your while trying to separate them all.  Towns change occupiers by the day, as two rival governments sit in separate former capital cities, each claiming administrative and diplomatic authority over what was once called the Islamic Republic of Libya.  Why has the West been so reticent to get involved, especially after basically being the harbinger of Qaddafi's end?  Obviously the United States maintained some modest presence in Benghazi, otherwise, how would a random gang of Islamic Extremists find a U.S. Ambassador and four Department of Defense employees to torture and murder?  The real tragedy, is that the Administration was aware of the unstable nature of the situation in Benghazi, yet no exfil plan existed in emergency circumstances.  To former Secretary of State Hillary Clinton not having an exfil plan is a small issue; it only cost the life of five Americans.  What should be a glaring gap in U.S. foreign policy is the complete lack of a coherent strategy to support democratic growth in Libya.  We are supposed to support the good guys, remember?  The ones who support freedom of religion, speech, and the establishment of a fair and all-inclusive Constitution?  I see nothing happening in Libya that is not instigated by militias and jihadists.  I don't see the French or the British anywhere, and I certainly don't see the United States.  Barack Obama was in Africa last week, but he skipped over Libya and landed in Kenya.  I hope he was able to visit some of the relatives he has living in the slums of Kibera.

Last week, a militia loyal to Al-Qaeda actually retook the town of Derna from ISIS, and according to the New Yorker (see link), executed the ISIS commander.  What a choice for a dinner guest....ISIS or Al-Qaeda.  Even with the temporary setback at Derna, ISIS has shown real strength in Libya, occupying Qaddafi's home town of Sirte and threatening Misrata.  More importantly to western petroleum interests, ISIS is also making inroads in Libya's "Oil Crescent"; maybe ISIS will start exporting oil from Libya first, as opposed to Baiji in Iraq, what has been the popular concern.  As the well-written and detail-heavy link explains, Libya has not been a functioning state since the death of Qaddafi, and today, any number of militias and extremist groups are having at each other, increasing the suffering of the average Libyan beyond belief.  Do we have a plan to provide aid to the needy people of Libya?  Absolutely not, because the country is thick with heavily armed teenagers with itchy trigger fingers.  Nothing useful can be accomplished without force.  In the past, the West has shown much more flexibility in these situations, deploying coalition forces to bring aid to the needy.  But we have returned to the thought process that saving Libyan lives is not worth putting at risk any American or European soldiers.  But the movers and shakers in DC, Paris, London and Den Hague may have to reconsider their position, as the complete breakdown in authority has allowed Libya to become the easiest transit route for African immigrants to reach Europe.  Even though ISIS kills any African Christian it gets its hands on, they will continue to come, in even greater numbers.  By this time next year, Italy will be facing a humanitarian crisis.  We recognize this, but is anyone doing anything?

Egypt and Tunisia are well-aware of the reach of ISIS, and both North African countries have take concrete steps to militarize their borders with Libya.  The Egyptians and Tunisians will be successful to a degree in keeping their beaches and tourist hotels safe, but they will also be enclosing all the African refugees and innocent Libyans.  May God protect the Christians, homosexuals, open-minded students, pregnant and single women, and human rights activists of Libya, who will be soon become the hunted.  How much responsibility does the West deserve for this development?  Not much, except for those Tomahawk missiles, which for all practical purposes, removed one stable government in favor of a new political matrix, which has yet to fully show itself. 

Combating The Spread Of Extremism In The Third World (Part II)

Links A. Impact of The Repudiation Of Third World Debt
          B. Council On Foreign Relations Comments Regarding Terrorism And Debt



(Part II)

I'm not an economist, though I have followed up on the arguments for and against the dissolution of all foreign debt in Africa.  From my simple perspective, I imagine that the elimination of all debt will loosen up capital for job creation, education reform, infrastructure development, hydro-electric projects, and much more.  Some individuals more cynical than myself, have argued for conditions on any debt relaxation agreement.  The concern is that once the constraints are removed, the inmates will be uncontrollable.  And why would that development automatically be considered a negative?  We want uncontrolled growth.  Granted, certain European and North American commodities might face some unexpected competition in the international marketplace.  Another concern is that providing African nations with control of so much of their own revenue (without that revenue automatically disappearing in loan payments) will encourage a return to the days of political despots.  The concern being, that if you remind the Africans of just how much wealth they have, that inevitably tribal conflict will return, along with the Idi Amins, Mobutu Sese Sekos, Jean-Bedel Bokassas, and the Robert Mugabes (wait a second....that crazy old rooster is still around, isn't he?).  I say, "Racist much?"  This type of thinking proceeds on the assumption that congenitally, the blacks of Africa (regardless of tribe, heritage or language), are unable to learn enough from the errors of the recent pass to avoid repeating those mistakes.  Having spent a decent amount of time in Africa (by the way, six months living in the leafy Pretoria suburbs of Waterkloof or Brooklyn, shopping at the conveniently located Checkers and Menlyn Park Mall, and dining at Priva Gastrolounge, does not constitute "Africa" in my book), I think the people of this continent are ready for a change.  And I don't think they will hesitate to remove anyone who tries to turn back the clock to the days of  endemic corruption.  The world is much smaller, and our leaders are much more accessible.  Africans (especially the younger generation) are ACHING for the opportunity to start with a "Coup de Torchon", a clean slate.  Most the these young people don't remember Daniel arap Moi, Kenneth Kaunda, or PW Botha.  The amazing advances in communication technology has revolutionized education on our planet.  Young people receive lessons in Cultural Geography and Social Studies every time they access the internet on their phone.  In the past, the list of options regarding future employment was limited by many factors.  Today, young people are beginning to accept the idea that they can achieve anything that they're willing to sacrifice and work for.

One particular argument against eliminating the debt of African nations is that it will discourage lenders from getting involved in Africa.  Who wants to make a loan that can be erased twenty years down the road?  No doubt Africa needs continued access to loans from wealthy countries, and its easy to understand how this decision could impact African nation's access to international currency.  But lets approach this dilemma seriously.  If the decision were made to dissolve all debt currently owed by African countries (including to each other), it would be a decision that could only be repeated again by the same group of people/organizations.  If there was a legitimate concern that this one isolated decision would create some contagion effect, removing debt from Latin America  (I already have a solution for Latin America...just dump everyone's debt into Christina Fernandez Kirchner's bank account) being next on the list, I would oppose this initiative.  But as long as rational thought properly influences the decision making process of everyone involved, I believe that a one-time elimination of all African debt, would not create expectations of the same decision being made in other places.  No one can convince me that Africa would become "persona non grata" with the international banking community.  Companies exist for the sole purpose of negotiating international loan agreements.  Personally, I would consider Africa to be one of the safest places to make a loan, if the international community had just agreed to a one-time elimination of all African debt.  Certainly that event won't be repeated in our lifetimes, so any new investment would be safe.  The idea that African countries would no longer have access to the IMF and the international banking community is bogus.  Africa will continue to provide endless opportunities for making money, and plenty companies and organizations looking to make a profit, will line-up to loan money to African nations.

My opinion on this subject has evolved.  When I was younger, I had a strong conviction regarding agreements between people.  Someone's word, and someone's signature, had to be worth something.  I believed that since countries had borrowed (and spent) the money, that they should pay it back.  A bit of research later, and I had discovered that many African countries were using new loans to pay the interest on previous loans.  Reminds me of me in my younger days.  Its all become a bit of a mess.  But technology has given Africans new hope for the future.  Nigeria, Equatorial Guinea, Sao Tome and Principe, Mali, and an encouraging number of other African nations are discovering oil reserves (mostly off the coast).  The process of fracking has also started to have an impact on a continent that has always been dependent on energy imports.  Once again, thanks to technology, we have confirmed that West Africa is home to more deposits of Gold and Diamonds than previously thought.  And I haven't even mentioned all the sensitive metals and minerals that sit under the African soil.  If African nations are relieved of the repressive debt obligation, then they would be better-positioned to create their own exploratory companies to access all of this hidden wealth. But some players in the game don't want self-sufficiency in certain market places.  They want to locate, dig, retrieve, and sell whatever particular resource of the moment, and pass back to the host nation a modest one-time payment.  That is the way it has always been done.  An elimination of African debt might just provide the impetus that encourages Mali to explore the north of the nation for oil on its own, not under the foot of a French company.  Wouldn't it be something if Guinea and Botswana cleaned and processed diamonds themselves, instead of relying on Dutch and Israeli companies?  In truth, I'm getting ahead of myself here.  I'm grasping, folks.  I'm looking for an opportunity to be excited for the future.  With Islamic Extremism expanding so rapidly, I welcome any change of circumstances.  Relieving Kenya of its international debt, will allow Nairobi to institute immediate job creation programs in the slums of Kibera.  The government of Kenya can win the battle against Al-Shabaab/Al-Qaeda for the hearts and minds of its young people.  The same argument can be made in Uganda and Nigeria.  Young people will gravitate to a legitimate opportunity to create a successful career, before they will agree to picking up an AK-47 and randomly killing people.  Call me foolishly optimistic, but this is what I believe.

The international banking community, including the IMF, should immediately institute a blanket forgiveness of all African debt, to include Mauritania, Ethiopia, Eritrea, Djibouti, and South Sudan.

The Most Miserable Place Known To Me

Links A. Data On Former Soviet Republics
          B. East Africa And Endemic Poverty
          C. The Favelas Of Sao Paulo, Brazil
          D. Child labor In Bolivia

When I chose this particular subject to write about, I was careful to limit the list of candidate-locations to places that were familiar to me.  Lets be honest; anyone can make a list of shit-hole cities.  I was careful in my selection.  I try diligently to avoid overly long posts.  If my friend Joe can't start and finish reading a post while he is on the train home from work, then its too long.  Having Joe fall asleep while reading a post is also something I hope to avoid.  It will be difficult for even the hardiest of people to fall asleep during this commentary.

In 1990, when the Soviet Union and the Eastern Bloc began to crumble, many of us in the west had no idea what to expect after a close inspection of life under communism.  The image I am unable to remove from my mind's eye is row after row of ugly, gray buildings.  Communism wanted everyone to have the same exact living quarters (no one should have something nicer than their neighbor), so in many former Eastern Bloc cities like Warsaw, Belgrade, and Bucharest, it is not uncommon to still see the endless rows of gray apartment buildings, although much of the old architecture has been torn down.  The municipal buildings fit the same mold: bleak, gray and utilitarian.  In some of the poorer nations in eastern Europe, the former municipal buildings are still in use.  Attempts are made to brighten the appearance with a bit of paint and some flower boxes, but the true effect is deep and permanent.  There is no cure for the "gray building disease".  The patient must be euthanized at the earliest opportunity.  I find much of eastern Europe depressing, even two decades after the collapse of the Iron Curtain.  Some cities have made tremendous progress regaining the appearance of pleasant, traditional European communities, Warsaw in particular.  For the purpose of this post, I must pick one particular city that I would describe as "miserable".  I choose Mitrovica, Kosovo.  I see no need to deliver a history lesson.  Kosovo was a province of Serbia with a predominantly Albanian population.  In 1998, the province descended into civil war, eventually involving Europe and the United States.  Since that time, Kosovo has declared its independence, although many of the communities with large Serbian populations are loath to break away from mother Serbia.  Mitrovica is a prime example of just such a community.  It is located in the north of the former province and has a population roughly evenly split between Albanians and Serbs.  And the last time I checked, they hated each other with a passion.  The Ibar River separates the two ethnicities, and a beautiful, new bridge was built in an attempt to foster forgiveness and economic integration.  Events have not followed the intended script, as fighting between the two groups has left Mitrovica resembling a Mad Max, post-apocalyptic town, with electricity outages, garbage in the streets, and vehicles that had seen better days pre-Hitler.  Some of the houses on both sides of the river (Serbs to the north, Albanians on the south) have started to deteriorate, others have already crumbled into a pile of bricks and mortar.  The residents of this community stare at each other across the river with distrust and anger.  I'm happy to admit that I haven't visited Mitrovica in almost a decade, so its possible that the city has come together and created one community working towards safe streets, refuse collection, functioning schools, and the creation of one central business district.  But for my dollar, Mitrovica deserves to be on the list of most miserable places.

Kibera is a community just north of Nairobi, Kenya.  It is a slum-like collection of informal houses, shacks, and lean-tos, with a population that varies from 100,000 to 1 million, depending on the source.  Kibera is a Town Planner's nightmare, as no one really knows which neighboring, smaller communities are part of Kibera and which ones are not.  Ideally, the government of Kenya would task government Town/Urban Planners to map Kibera, street by street and house by house.  As many homes as possible will be left standing, but any effort to bring services to Kibera and upgrade the roads and the existing facilities will require the destruction of most shacks and shanties.  Some of those shacks and shanties house families of ten or more.  The effort to put Kibera on the grid, build real hospitals and schools, and create safe housing will never begin in earnest until the community itself is ready to make the necessary sacrifices.  Until then, segments of Kibera will improve, one section at a time.  At least its progress for some.  For the majority of the residents of Kibera, life is a struggle that is impossible for most westerners to comprehend.  Finding food is a daily adventure, especially when you have a family to feed.  Living in large townships can be very dangerous, and anyone who has anything of value is smart to keep it out of sight.  Sanitation is basically non-existent, although water is available from pipes that have been laid by the city.  My memory of Kibera is of a place that is full of children.  And interestingly enough, they were always laughing and playing soccer.  The Kenyan government has good intentions regarding Kibera, but it will take a tremendous infusion of state resources, and the complete cooperation of the people of Kibera, to remold this community into a safe, recognizable suburb.

The favelas of Sao Paulo have received a great deal of press in recent years, although the gangs of children that seem to interest most people, have been around for decades.  Favelas share many of the usual characteristics of large, urban slums.  The people are the poorest of the poor, most of the housing is informal, economic activity comes in all shapes and sizes, drugs are prevalent, and every day is a struggle for survival.  One factor which separates the favelas from many of the other famous slums of the world, is the presence of the gangs of children.  We aren't referring to groups of kids playing soccer or stealing the odd candy from the neighborhood store.  The slums of Sao Paulo and Rio De Janeiro are inhabited by gangs of kids under the age of ten.  Many of them are addicted to glue sniffing, or if they can get it, crack and heroin.  They are often armed and terrorize otherwise peaceful residents of the favela.  A few years ago, a scandal erupted in Brazil as it was disclosed that the police were targeting the gangs "off the record".  These young kids were often armed and exhibited no fear of authority, possibly a result of being hyped-up on booze, glue and whatever else they could access.  A policeman is shot here and there, and the cops feel the justification to eradicate this problem.  While the targeting was in effect, no one complained.  Everyone had been a victim of the gangs at one time or another, and they were seen as nothing more than a virus.  The young kids, without parents probably since birth, living on the streets, dealing with underage prostitution and pedophiles, turned to each other because no one cared.  And they learned how to make hunger go away by watching the shake-downs of organized crime.  They formed gangs, stole weapons, and took to the streets.  Some estimate that in the favelas of Sao Paulo there are at least 100,000 abandoned kids trying to find a daily meal.  What a tragedy that adults act indignant when a child choses the easiest method of survival.  In the favelas of Brazil, being miserable isn't an emotion, its a condition. 

The last place on my list is Potosi, Bolivia, which is home to Cerro Rico, of Hill of Riches.  Since the 16th century, miners have labored inside of Cerro Rico, extracting silver.  The neighboring town of Potosi used to be nothing more than a small market village, but it has become a city full of the young boys and old men who venture everyday into Cerro Rico for work.  Notice I didn't mention men of average age.  That's because in Potosi, the men appear either very young, or middle aged.  That is a result of spending upwards of 18 hours a day inside of the mountain.  Laws supposedly limit the age of workers to sixteen years of age, but the reality is that boy as young as ten are working in the mine.  In fact, child labor seems to be all the rage in Bolivia.  I thought the latest ethnically indigenous America-hating Socialist was going to fix everything.  Seems to me things have only deteriorated.  But I'm a bit of a skeptic when it comes to these sandal-wearing pretend-farmers who managed to get themselves elected president of South American countries by blaming everything from the weather to the boil on someone's ass on the evil "Yanquis".  But the fact that children are digging around in Cerro Rico, creating more wealth for rich hedge funds who have invested in the various mines that dot the landscape, is enough to make me go postal.  I'm not socialist, but I can't help but wonder, just how much money do some people need?  And that goes for you out in Hollywood as well, and all the athletes in the U.S. and Europe, who make more in salary and endorsements than the GDP of some countries, just for kicking around a soccer ball.  Potosi is a miserable place, and thank goodness I was just passing through.  The kids that work in the mines, and the ones who are shining shoes or sleeping with truck driver's in La Paz bordellos, never get to experience the joys of childhood.  The kids who work in the mines get up when its dark, and they come home when its dark.  Inside the mine it is dark as well, and the eyesight of these young people suffers from this unnatural existence in almost total darkness.  I might not be so opposed to these kids working to help support their families, or to save money for college, if they were receiving a decent salary for their efforts.  Unfortunately, they will destroy their bodies and consign themselves to blindness at an early age, for just enough money to feed the family.  The name of Cerro Rico should be changed to Cerro Miserable.

I realize that some of my readers expected to find a commentary on actual geographic locations and how people struggle because of where they live.  it was my intention to write this post along those guidelines.  But then it took on a life of its own.  I am horrified by the lives children are obliged to lead in our society, circa 2014.  When it comes to this issue, I only wish I could find a reason to be optimistic.